OK Darryl, fine with me.
The "Distortion" I speak of is the visible spectrum in the "flare of the bolide" or the body of the sundog. If it is a bolide, this would have to be distortion known as chromatic abberation (CA) and if the lens was that poor to show that much CA, it would be clearly visible in other parts of the image too. However in this case, it is restricted to the "flare" and the spectrum is correct for a Sun dog (red towards the Sun) and the tail matches a Perhelic arc See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parhelic_circle (When they are very strong, as in the images on that page, the arc can be seen completely encircling the sky at the same elevation of the Sun. When they are weak, they only form a short tail for the dog. One more thing about the image itself, a bolide this bright in the daytime would leave an obvious smoke trail behind the ionization, one that wouldn't fade away as it does in this image. This photo matches a weak Parhelic arc but not a bolide plasma -> smoke trail. The last few things I'll say about this I'll say as a photographer instead of as an astronomer. One of my photographic subjects are birds. I know how often I miss images because though I'm ready to make images with my camera which is on and ready to go, because I'm not fast enough and the camera isn't up to my eye. And sometimes, even when it is! I have to question his ability of catching a bolide with a cell phone camera for a number of reasons. He needed to see the object, ID it as strange, grab his phone, turn on the camera and let it start, then point it and shoot. Of course he may have been taking other images with the camera on his phone, so his response would have been quicker, but that not what he claims in the article. However, and probably the best evidence refuting his claim, there is no visible blur to the objects on the ground, so he probably had time to compose the shot. Unlikely in such a rapidly eveolving event as a daytime bolide. Nearly every cell camera can shoot video too. If he had presence of mind to get a shot with his cell in the first place, why not get video of the event instead of a still? Cheers -- Richard Kowalski http://fullmoonphotography.net IMCA #1081 --- On Tue, 9/1/09, Darryl Pitt <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Darryl Pitt <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Bolide? Doggone? > To: "Richard Kowalski" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Meteorite List" <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, September 1, 2009, 12:35 PM > > > Hi Richard, > > I appreciate your thoughts and your analysis could very > well be spot on---but low resolution and soft focus at > infinity are not distortions of the sort to which you > allude, and I think I'll hold fast to the notion of a > "bolide by camera-phone" being able to evoke a sun dog. > > I suppose in the end I just have a bit more faith in the > report of a ball "speeding across the sky"..... > > ....and of course I agree that embellished eyewitness > accounts can be problematic (along with my misplaced faith) > > ;-) Oh well. > > > And all best / Darryl ______________________________________________ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
